pinnit2015

What a weird site they have - despite having their UK Licence they don't accept UK yet (nothing wrong with that - probably won't bother entering now) But they still allow you to go through the registration process, even having the +44 UK code for mobile. You do all that and then they say 'country restricted' So, anyone from the UK - don't bother trying to register For Voodoodreams - sort your site out.

One thing I'd like to know the answer is why UK sites like Sky/Willy Hill etc do not ask for proof of payment method? I used to think they relied on something that verified me as the owner of the card but the BET365 thread would not appear to be the case. I've had 5 cards and 20k of withdrawals from WH in 5 years and never once had to take a pic of them. So either they do something that others don't or...

Don't know where you're based but 'compensated games' are not permitted in the online world in the UK, per the remote gambling standards.

Tell a lie - there maybe something in the licence that they must comply with all other relevant legislation or something like that...regardless of whether it's outlined, the Data Protection Laws will apply (subject to a few things)

What a coincidence ? The test now is to do it again ?

Good thing with the UK is that, in theory, casinos need to verify your identity and address prior to deposits. If they can't do this electronically, again in theory, you can't deposit. Even if they do they need to outline what they may need from your in the future. Don't think that there's anything in a casinos licence that outline the security measures they must have to handle documents - they have a duty to comply though with things like GDPR however and there will be retention periods of how long they hold the info per their legal obligations such as AML. They can be fined if they breach this. I'd expect MGA/UKGC to have reasonable security protocols but I have reported one UKGC casino for a data breach in the past - they sent me another persons info!-so it's not a certainty. Email, generally speaking, is not secure unless end to end encryption. Even if it is there are issues over who has access to that inbox - 4 people, 40 people? - I don't like it. Better to have a secure upload facility that can have better data controls around it. Good luck in finding out which are ISO Accredited or NIST etc ? Some sites, for example, list whether they are PCI-DSS compliant on their site: normally a good sign and if you check the terms and conditions you'll see reference to what standards they adhere to or a general statement on how they handle data.

The poster's name is the name of a Crypto site.

It's pretty par for the course - casino's refuse to accept pictures that have an edge missing in the picture so I think including watermarks would see most rejecting (though weird that they accepted) Most UK based casinos will verify you electronically, negating the need for proof of ID/Address to be sent in, in most cases. The request for a selfie isn't a licence condition check but many places request it as part of their policy.

https://www.actionfraud.police.uk/reporting-fraud-and-cyber-crime

We see some big companies getting into it - IBM, Fedex, Walmart (in conjunction with IBM i think) but tbh I'm not sure how commonplace it will be in 10 years. I did like Roubini's comments about 'paid propagandists' re Bitcoin as there seems to be an awful lot of BC spammers going about ? Personally, Bitcoin does nothing for me. Not yet, maybe it will, maybe it won't - jury's out.

So they get to keep the money in their eyes - how nice of them. Good to know, should the desire to use stolen cards come upon me, a card with a different name to the account holder can be used freely. I don't even need to go to the hassle of using a different name. Could they not have withdrawn? I have a BET365 account and not once have i been asked for copies of my cards - that includes when i add new ones. I'd kick it to the ombudsman.

Google translate didn't even understand that.

Spooky ? You'd think they'd be a bit more diligent given that they knew a fine was coming through - 5.9 million might be chum change out of their profits but still.

Sounds like either A. They're being a bit mischievous (not like them tbf) or B. Incompetent Either way, pretty unacceptable.

It’s a pretty boilerplate response that, considering the bbc article, doesn’t chime well with the current climate.

Ladbrokes Coral fined after customer lost £98,000 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49175515 ding a ling; here comes the regulatory fine train. Not one of these is it? ?

Suppose: if separate and he’s not went into the bonus funds it’s difficult to see where the advantage of the bonus is. Becomes irrelevant : but that’s not to say they won’t quote ts and cs back at you; however unfair If you’re in the bonus funds when separate: forget it, you’re done. Together? Argument is you had advantage play as you could bet bigger for longer with the bonus funds. Depends on their terms I suppose: some might say ‘claimed’ : which would seem to imply the point of deposit is when all you’re future winnings become void as it’s not distinguishing if you used it/if separate etc I think it’s very harsh in the first instance to void winnings. Especially if the bonus is automated upon deposit.

KYC would have been good: the OP should ask 365 if the front cover of Stg Peppers was used as a selfie.

Times are probably tough for Lennon: faking your own death and having Michael Jackson buying the back catalogue, has meant he’s had to take to Sports Betting to fund his hippy communes.

Bit like how some casinos find it easy to block restricted games and some don’t. Can only see one reason why. Even if there’s been no advantage play, most will trot out the ts and cs and confiscate. Even if you argue that as it’s 2019 they should have their systems set up (it’s easy) to stop instances like this happening. Youll find some are softer and more lenient if you’ve been playing with them a while but as this is a welcome bonus, you don’t have that. Don’t see any harm in naming the casino : you’ve not savaged them.

Speaking of which, they're actually recruiting at the GC for something with my background - if i was inclined to live in Birmingham (which, for anyone who's been there, you wouldn't) I'd be tempted to apply. If i have a change of heart I'll raise your case at the monthly meetings with their compliance dude? Jesting aside - let us know if they ever come back with anything?

No problem - we'll probably be at a different place in a few years with all this (if there are any casino's bar the big boys, left). It depends on who's attention things like this capture as to what happens - i know of one guy who had the UKGC inquire as to a rather large payment, for example, that wasn't forthcoming - and surprise, surprise the casino fast tracked it: though this is very much the exception s as they aren't an Ombudsman - maybe they've started to put 'Justice Seeker' in their more recent job descriptions for case workers, who knows). Given that you've probably read more of the UKGC's LCCP than some casino's out there, i would suggest having a wee read of Natasha Schull's Book: Addiction By Design as there's some interesting walkthroughs of how casino's aim to snare punters (albeit, Land Based predominately) Best of Luck and I hope your son gets over the more debilitating aspect of addiction - the psychological one. Money can be fixed relatively easily compared to that. More interest in 'interests' is a good sign.

Yeah, pretty much all you can do is let the UKGC know of it. Minor caveat to IBAS - whilst the above, as stated is true, and they won't get involved in these issues there is a situation in which they may permit it: if the casino in question is subsequently subject to a financial penalty for similar circumstances to your complaint, they WOULD CONSIDER hearing it. I imagine that's not very common. I admire your persistence but looks like you're reaching/reached the cul de sac in terms of moving forward.

Remember that the burden is on the bank to show that you made the transaction, not for you to show that you didn't. Disappointed, but not surprised given their size, of Bet365's response. Was it a case of you (say Joe Bloggs) having your card used on an account (called John Lennon?) Or did they not even go into that?